Part of the work my Finance for the Future colleague, Colin Hines, has been doing on our joint project on ways to pay for the green transition has been to work with energy companies to find ways to fund the in-household transition to heat pumps that is required. As part of that work he has been using his own street as a test bed of opinion.
Larry Elliott has written this up in the Guardian this morning:
The very obvious problem that we face is referred to in Larry's conclusion in which one of Colin's neighbours says:
The will is there, the money isn't.
Which is precisely why we think that the government should give a bigger kick start to this process than it already is.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
We live in one of the richest countries in there world. The money *is* there; it is just poorly distributed. There should be no lack of capital to make investments that save money in the long run. Collectively, as a society, we just have to insist upon it.
Is your friend Colin a heating engineer? …I hear over and over again that heat pumps are unreliable regardless of the cost
I’ve also heard that the earth is flat.
Do you believe that as well?
Have you installed a heat pump, Richard?
It would set a wonderful example.
Discussions suggest that next year one well suited to my house will be available and if so I will be taking the option very seriously
More seriously than I do your claim to be Geraldine Ford
Off-topic – are you going to comment on what looks like a scam from the Riksbank? When you tie it in with what Bailey’s mob are doing here it begins to look like a concerted international effort to loot the public being carried out by some supposedly respectable sections of the financial sector.
Only if time permits
And it is in short supply
One of the problems with the Government’s expectation that we should all rip out our existing heating and install air source heat pumps is that they want everyone to become ‘early adopters’ The reality is that most of us are not, are cautious of new technology and want to see that it actually works. Many renewable technologies are still very much in a developmental stage, solar panel and wind turbine technology for example evolving rapidly with costs tumbling. I anticipate the same will be true for electric cars (which in my view have a long way to go before being viable for the wider population) and heat pumps. I recently tried unsuccessfully to get three quotes for an ASHP to replace my aging oil boiler in order to qualify for a Government grant. I eventually got one quote for £20K. I eventually opted for a new more efficient, bio-fuel adaptable oil boiler fitted costing £4.5K.
Another fine idea that might not see the light of day.
But also, heat pumps don’t last forever – we are talking about a long term commitment here and the only commitment I see from government is to do less.
Little wrong with heat pumps provided they are sized and installed by people that have the correct skill set. Given the price disparity between an elec kWh and a gas kWh some action needs to be addressed to this. If the HP COP is circa 3:1 (typical) then you would need a price disparity between gas and elec of no more than that (3:1).
This from a web site: “The per kWh cap essentially fixes the per unit costs at 27p/kWh for electricity and 7p/kWh for gas, inclusive of VAT, from 1 October 2023” so elec x4 (ish) compared to gas.
Parking for one minute the financials, the other problem is that local distribution networks will not support heat pump penetrations above 30% (and of course home electricial vehicle charging). The UK’s distribution networks, at least the underground sections (typical of urban and suburban areas) were mostly built in the 1950s, 60s, & 70s by Irish contract labour. That labour pool is no longer available. I’m not saying don’t do heat pumps – but a cursory consideration of the load they impose shows that one would need to, at least doublt the copper in the network to support such a load. There are work around solutions – but they require that one considers energy networks – not electrical networks – which are subset, elec currently meeting circa 20% of the UK’s energy needs.
As local electricity networks are not designed to handle the the total load that would be imposed if everyone on the network was using close to their load limit of 100A, I can understand the 30% penetration limit for heat pumps. Here’s a possible solution.
Run the local networks at 600V and fit 600/230V 23kVA step down transformers at each property. The network capacity would be increased by a factor of 2.6. The size of currently available transformers of this rating is a cube about 50cm each way. 600V is the insulation rating to earth for standard low voltage cables, so existing cables should cope. No need to dig up the road, just interrupt the supply to each property and install a transformer. It would still require a lot of work but the disruption would be minimised.
I have no idea whether this has been considered and discarded for technical reasons, but thought I ought to put the idea out there.
That one is not for me…..
Transmission voltage in the UK is dropped from 400kV to11kV then transformed down to 3ph 415v at local substations, for transmission to domestic and industrial use. Industrial systems use 3ph 415v internally, and each phase to neutral, is 240v, (for use domestically) so It would not be practical to use 600v locally.
As has been mentioned elsewhere, before even considering heatpumps, heat loss must be addressed. Increasing the poor levels of insulation in uk housing and industrial units, whilst daunting, would reduce significantly the use of energy for heating. Only at that point should an alternative to gas be investigated.
Mr Trow – very good suggestion – made me smile & indeed, most/all 3 phase mains are rated @ 600v (for PVC sheathed cable the volt rating is stamped on the cable). It would be a very good work around solution. How to implement – given there is interconnection between many HV/LV subs. But in fairness, it is doable. I like it – bravo that man!
Thank you
It sounded rather clever to me
If only the GOVT would get really serious about insulation, the many problems with the supply of heat would be greatly reduced almost to the point of irrelevance. Also their obsession with insisting that a heatpump must be the only heatsource is a real hurdle for the technology. For EG we have solar thermal for hot water, solar PV and Batteries for leccy, a woodburner (cough cough) and a gas boiler to back it all up. All the kit including fitting about £12,000, ok I fitted most of it myself with help, but our grid demand for gas and leccy has fallen by over 80% and we export a lot of leccy for free.
Done properly it’s a no brainer, done the GOVTs way it’s a shambles.
Big issue for me is that the grant available is for ‘all or nothing’ ie removal of existing gas boiler and replacing with a heat pump. In many properties a ‘hybrid’ of both systems would be a better intermediary solution mainly because heat pumps are poor at providing hot water and need topped up with an electric immersion heater
Do you have to pull your immersion heater out?
No, they need a hot water tank to make it work for the domestic hot water. They want to upgrade any existing tank though.
I’m sure that the big 6 energy producers will be delighted with everyone installing heat pumps which consume their expensive electricity, produced largely from fossil fuels or nuclear power.
A better course to plot would be converting existing boilers to hydrogen and introducing that the the existing gas network. Cheaper, cleaner and greener. IMO.
We have been through this so many times here
Don’t waste time with nonsense, please
Hydrogen has been considered as a medium for domestic heating and is listed by the IMechE in their assessment of domestic heating options. But your suggestion has one fatal flaw if the aim is to prevent the big 6 electricity generators making big gains and that is that the only source of clean hydrogen is by electrolysis of water which requires electricity and is about 60% efficient. So for every kWh of hydrogen produced, the electricity generators will sell 1.67kWh of electricity. For a heat pump with a COP of 3, the electricity generators will sell only 0.3kWh of electricity for every kWh of heat used. Your scheme will lead to the electricity generators selling 5 times as much electricity!
Hydrogen will probably be essential for many purposes, including a heat source for heavy industry (including steel production), a fuel source for HGVs and a standby fuel for electricity generation when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining. It might also be used for domestic heating where alternatives are not viable. Clean hydrogen can be produced by the electricity generators to avoid curtailment when electricity demand is low when operating conditions favour clean electricity. It can then be stored and then used as required.
I have noted what Mike Parr has had to say on this here and have been persuaded
The most obvious suggestion I might make is that we need to look at the point where people buy houses with possibly mandatory energy improvements at that point?
I dont pretend to be a heating engineer but what I dont understand is why we dont use air to air systems like the US & Canada rather than ‘wet’ ones.
It’s hard to find reliable estimates for the cost of running a heat pump for an average house for a year, but on the basis of running a 5.8kwh system (suitable for an average house of 650sq feet), for 12 hours a day for 6 months of the year, at cost of 28p/kwH, then you get to something around £3,507. That may be on the high side and depends on how well insulated your house is, how cold the weather is, and how warm you like your house. So perhaps something between £2,800 and £3,800 is realistic?
Electricity costs are predicted to rise, so I guess we can assume that this cost is only going to increase, but perhaps only at a few percentage points per year.
I previously had a wood pellet boiler and am thinking of putting another one in. They are 80 to 90% efficient, very clean burning, and require very little energy to run. My annual consumption was around 1.5T of pellets which comes in at around £650/pa. I’m fortunate that I have underfloor heating and a pellet boiler is well suited to this. But for now I actually have an electric boiler for my heating. I run it for a few hours a day on the colder days and I reckon it costs me around £2k/pa. Still a lot cheaper than an air source heat pump and a lot cheaper to install and purchase. I have an immersion heater for hot water but when I get the pellet boiler installed, I won’t need to use it any more. As it is, I’m very strict about how often it gets switched on, and for how long.
I live in a very rural area so no option for gas, and I wouldn’t go for oil on principle. So my options are limited. I’m going to install a solar array in the new year, with my own battery bank, so I’ll be independent of the grid. That will cost me around £12K max. Still a lot cheaper than an air source heat pump.
My conclusions are that it is very hard to know what is the best solution but that anything that keeps your reliance on the grid to a minimum, has got to be a good thing. I foresee power cuts and problems with intermittent supply ahead, so anything that provides you with some protection from those, has got to be a good thing. But I recognise that this won’t be an option for many. Tough choices, no matter how you look at it.
Miss N,
The Guardian has an article today that makes an opposite argument to your own. It contends that wood burners are more costly for heating than gas boilers. Here is the link should you wish to check it out:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/11/wood-burners-more-costly-for-heating-than-gas-boilers-study-finds
I am not saying you are wrong, as I am not a heating engineer, only pointing out that some research does not support what you are saying.
But she said gas wasn’t an option because of where she lives.
Jenw, sorry, I must have missed that.
Hi Larry – I was talking about a wood pellet boiler which is quite different from a wood burning stove, which I absolutely agree are not comparable with gas boilers and do give rise to a lot of particulates which can be damaging to health.
A wood pellet boiler consumes pellets made up of waste products from the timber processing industry such as shavings, sawdust and bark and are made by simply passing the waste products through a pelletiser. There is sufficient lignin/moisture in the sawdust to bind the pellets together. The biomass boilers burn at around 90% efficiency, and there is very low particulate/ash output, so they are a much cleaner option than a wood burner.
I also quite like the job of loading the pellets into the hopper – gives me a real sense of how much I’m consuming and the smell of the pellets is rather lovely too!
Unfortunately, many of those pellets are imported
Do more local community based options have a role to play?
There does not seem to be much discussion in this country of the potential of district heating networks, though they are widespread in some European countries.
https://www.wedistrict.eu/interactive-map-share-of-district-heating-and-cooling-
networkacross-europe/
Is this another example of our seeming surrender to centralisation and large corporations?
Thankfully some are showing the way
https://www.local.gov.uk/case-studies/leeds-city-council-low-carbon-heat-network
I personally doubt it
I would like to be wrong but can’t see it happening
I think district heating (with ground source heat pumps, or other sources of actual heat) are possible in specific situations. A lot of our housing is too dispersed (classic streets of semis, mostly built to what we now know are poor standards; and retrofitting is another thing…). Apartment blocks or public buildings are more suitable. Sheffield has had a system for years (fuelled by the waste incinerator).
Community energy schemes should be developed but mostly based on solar PV and battery systems (and again, including public buildings with demand timings that differ from domestic).
https://www.choose.co.uk/energy/guide/community-energy/
In the mid 70s- 80s we lived in Peterborough where there was a district heating scheme. We thought it was a very good scheme, but others didn’t and eventually the area moved back to individual houses having their own heating systems.
Now I live near Durham where there is an Archimedes screw on the River Wear which produces electricity for quite a large group of office blocks.
https://renewablesfirst.co.uk/project-blog/freemans-reach-hydro-scheme/
The irony there is that Carillion were the main contractors.
Community energy can work if people have the will. I am sure any people still living in that area of Peterborough wish they had their district heating scheme now.
I know neither of these examples are to do with heat pumps. My husband was looking at heat pumps for this house before he died.
But it shows that there have always been people looking at local resources and with ideas to improve energy mix.
Thanks for sharing this insightful update on the efforts to fund the transition to heat pumps and address the challenges faced by households in making this shift. The collaboration with energy companies and the use of your colleague’s street as a test bed provide valuable real-world insights. As highlighted by one of the neighbors, the will for change is present, but financial barriers remain a significant hurdle. It underscores the importance of government support to provide the necessary financial impetus for a smoother and more widespread transition to sustainable heating solutions.
Big fan of the blog, Richard. I have to admit your knowledge of the financial world leaves me as a receiver of information to improve my understanding, but with little to contribute. This latest post does allow me to chip in so for what it’s worth.
We have recently evaluated the viability of the green transition to either an Air Source Heat Pump or Solar. This has been driven by a combination of the great UK energy consumer rip-off and the non-existent customer service of British Gas – in a time of record profits. In short, solar panels in combination with a 10kWh battery and an EV charger won hands down. The ASHP option applied to our 13 year old detached house which is up to the latest insulation standards required expensive plumbing and radiator upgrades throughout the house. The solar option, with the current VAT waiving subsidy, whilst initially expensive at c£15k will, in priority order, provide power to the house, then charging of the battery for overnight electricity, power the immersion for hot water heating, power the EV charger, and then any surplus to the grid at 15p per kWh via Octopus, with the facility to buy back at 15p per kWh overnight to charge battery/EV/immersion in times of poor daylight. Installation takes place in a couple of weeks and so I will report back on the real world results. However, our next door neighbour after a year post solar install has seen their combined gas and electricity direct debit fall from c£400 per month to a net £28. This is before you factor in the additional saving in petrol costs by going for an EV/hybrid. The industry regulated NPV and years to payback figures provided as standard on a solar quotation are incredibly pessimistic (I was quoted 13 years, my neighbour calculates 4.5 years real world), this puts many people off. One of my final conclusions was that an ASHP will still inevitably leave you increasingly at the mercy of the great UK energy rip-off, of which I have had enough.
Fascinating
Thank you
A relative of mine who is an engineer remains decidedly unconvinced by heat pumps but has just fitted solar panels with a battery and is very impressed.
We have a small solar PV system thats over 10 years old and solar hot water, but we benefit from a very high Feed in Tariff and have gradually being installing more energy efficient appliances and improved our insulation and windows which is gradually paying off.
Worth pointing out that as far as I could see electric cars suffered from being initially bought by ‘early adopters’ who had done their homework and lived with some of the ‘quirks’ of recharging which led to ‘normals’ being rather disappointed.
We had an air-sourced heat pump system fitted this week. In the 4 days since, it has consumed 40kWh of electricity and delivered 150kWh of heat, which is tremendous efficiency.
We haven’t yet settled on the best timings/temperatures/operating modes and we’ll tune it as we go forward using the associated app on our phones. By doing this I expect we’ll reduce the operating time per day and therefore the consumption.
We have a 1905 stone-built terrace over 4 floors (basement/ground/first/attic) and have insulated where we can, but that isn’t a great deal. So far the heating system – which includes new, more powerful radiators on the existing pipework) is doing a better job than the previous gas combi boiler with lower temperatures but more manageable heat.
As others have said, financially, the main issue is the high kWh price of electricity, which of course bears no relation to cost of generation now we have so much wind and solar. So far, so good I feel.
Keep us posted
I think the radiator / pipe issue is big
I am told that next year higher temperature pumps will become available eliminating this issue
Lot’s of opinions here that appear to lack evidence or experience.
It’s not just the money. We have just installed and commissioned a Panasonic Air Source Heat Pump as part of a 65m ground floor extension to a 1930s 3-bed house in the Midlands.
The major problems preventing wider and faster adoption of ASHPs are:
1. Selection of the “best” ASHP for the project and a shortage of experienced, reliable installation companies.
2. Shortage of skilled people who can handle the “new” technology that has been around for decades.
3. Grants are dependent on having a fairly high EPC, ie. good insulation in the house, and there is no financial support for that.
4. Existing houses with wet heating systems may require new piping and radiators to match the lower temperatures and greater flow from the ASHP.
5. The grant application process for the installer is ball-breakingly tedious, takes considerable administrative time, and therefore smaller companies are reluctant to to do it, and it increases costs for those that do apply.
6. The project management process for the client and/or their architect I’d therefore far more complex than it need be.
Other countries do it differently.
I’m told by my Architect that in Italy the government scheme surveys the property, and if the heating system and insulation of the fabric of the building requires improvement, it’s all done as a package, project-managed by the scheme.
The increase in grant for the ASHP from £5k to £7.5k gives us £2.5k we weren’t expecting, and frankly didn’t need.
Our project involves 150mm insulation in floor, walls and roof, Under Floor Heating, anf tripple glazing in the new building, and External Wall Insulation of the existing external walls that have no cavity.
We previously had a gas combined boil and now have no gas.
The ASHP provides plenty of hot water without an immersion heater , and the house is warmer than before, even though the floor and existing radiators hardly get warm (it is only Autumn). We’re aiming for a COP of 4, and we ‘re confident of achieving that.
PS. We’ve had over 5 years’ blissful, reliable and cheap motoring in an all-electric car. They still say they are rubbish, too.
Thanks for reading.
Thank you
What car?
2018 Tesla Model S75 D. 58k miles of pure pleasure* other than the proprietor’s fascist tendencies.
*Exceptions include autopilot (sic), auto wipers, and Tesla removing free supercharging that was part of the original deal.
Are opinions not allowed?
My experience of a Hyundai Kona 64kWh.
“I have been offered sympathy by friends and neighbours for my error in choosing an electric car, so I should like to give an example of a trip. We are both thoroughly pleased with the car – and our decision. It is the nicest car to drive that I have ever driven in 65 years driving.
We have had the Kona EV since January 23. It has now done 3864 miles locally with some longer trips (Kingsbridge 180 m return, Fleet 200 m return, Shaftesbury, Bournemouth, Salisbury etc.) It has always been charged at home through our OHME outlet. Overnight the rate is 7.5p/kWh instead of the current household rate of 29p, which means that our energy cost driving is just under 2p per mile. Up to recently we had never charged at a public charger – always much more expensive, and now not dissimilar to the cost of liquid fuel.
We had a funeral to attend in Nantwich. So charged (unusually) to 100%, giving us a range of around 300 miles. Nantwich is 229 miles, so within range, but charging points in Nantwich are not brilliant, particularly near the Swan Inn, booked for our trip. On one of the EV blogs someone has edited the map of UK charging stations, indicating only quality ones. (Must have at least 5 posts and be reliable.) I used this map to plan our trip. I chose 2 stations at Bristol, 2 at West Bromwich and 2 at Stafford, and entered these in TomTom GPS navigator, just in case I might need them. (Hyundai’s navigator is AWFUL by comparison with TT.) I also took note of distances to next points on the route just so I would have confidence, comparing the distance to go with the indicated range left, on the dash. The plan was to charge at Stafford, 30 miles short of Nantwich so we should have enough juice to run around and start home, charging at either Bristol or West Bromwich depending on how much we had used in Nantwich.
We left home at 0950 and had two biblical downpours before Yeovil, but pretty much blue sky and sunshine all the way to Nantwich and only minor congestion. So we arrived at Stafford Ionity charging station around 1400 on Saturday. All six posts were occupied but no one waiting. We got out the lunch picnic but had to move into a vacant stall after 10 minutes. Flashing my MyHundai RFID card at the Ionity post got my paying accepted instantly. I penetrated the car with the high-power DC plug so we had lost our Public-Charging virginity. I had set charging to 80% as recommended. We just had time to finish our picnic, pour the coffee and drink it before the charging finished. (35 minutes arrive to depart.)
On Monday, we left Natwich with 57% in the “tank”, just a little less than my estimate. But we had changed the plan; I calculated that if I stopped at Stafford again and charged to 90% we could get all the way home with 54 miles left in the “tank”. (In fact I could have charged to 80% and still have got home but with only around 25 miles left, but we chose to be safe.)
We ran into stationary traffic as soon as we joined the M6 at Nantwich (TT had told us to go north but we ignored it, foolishly?) It was stop start all the way to Stafford – very frustrating – and it rained, misted us up which wanted aircon demist, which does use juice. So we used it intermittently as necessary and increased the cabin temperature a bit which sorted the problem. [We have heated and cooled seats, so Helen had her seat set on 1 notch heating.] At Stafford, we pulled into the station and found it fully occupied and one car waiting, but in fact two stalls became vacant within a couple of minutes. The car dash showed that 80% charge would be reached in 32 minutes, but 90% would take 56 minutes; charging has to be slowed above 80% to be kind to the battery. So again we broke out the picnic lunch but then went in to Costa Coffee to use the facilities and have coffee. We were back on the M6 in about an hour and had the most dreadful journey all the way down to M5, when it eased considerably. It pelted down intermittently and we were constantly brought to a standstill by the congestion. It got dark by 1700, partly because of the heavy cloud. We had 3 hours driving with the LED headlights on – no problem! M5 was busy, but no actual stoppages, and little rain. We had only one very light shower on the road to Yeovil so the roads remained dry – thankfully – in the dark. We were home at 1950 with 23% left in the “tank” – good for 55 miles. Maybe charging to 90% was not the most efficient; had I charged to 80% and then did a 10% or 20% quick top-up at a pee-stop, for safety, at Bristol, I could have been home a little quicker. The service stations on the motorways are typically British disgracefulness – just 3 charging posts and a million cars in the park – but we knew that from our map.
Total trip distance was 494 miles. We paid Ionity £43.34 for 55.67kWh in 2 charges. So trip cost was £47.02 including the initial home charging. I could have saved more by being braver.
So I think the car is ideal for us because, being retired, almost all of our mileage is local. It does need careful planning for longer journeys and that may sometimes be more difficult (and expensive) in UK because of the lack of infrastructure. If it wasn’t for looming medical procedures, we would probably already have tried our luck driving to southern Spain, making use of Brittany Ferries special offers. We have planned routes and it looks fine – significantly better continental infrastructure..
I think most of you also have no excuses! Those of you who like caravanning may have a little more difficulty, but it is still not impossible to join us halo-heads in trying to save the planet!